From: Phillip Gawlowski Date: 2008-04-09T02:35:12+09:00 Subject: Re: Ruby's not ready - an indepth essay -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Austin Ziegler wrote: | On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 12:05 AM, Phillip Gawlowski | wrote: |> Austin Ziegler wrote: |> | (Yes, Virginia. Most people don't need full-on Unicode munging in |> | their code. It's necessary when you do need it, but most people don't |> | need it.) |> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Unicode.html |> |> I need it. Most of Europe needs it. Not to mention Arabia, Japan, and |> everybody else not speaking English. | | You didn't read what I said. I said "most people don't need full-on | Unicode munging." This is true. There are some cases where it's | absolutely necessary, but most people just need to know that they're | not going to screw up things when they work with Unicode. Without Unicode support, a string operation in a non-English alphabet will work as expected. Any language with more characters in the alphabet that English, needs full Unicode support. | | You can write Unicode-safe applications without needing full Unicode | string munging. Easily. Most Rails apps should probably be doing | exactly that. Without Unicode support, you can't be Unicode safe. That's a tautology. Also: Rails rolls its own Unicode support. - -- Phillip Gawlowski Twitter: twitter.com/cynicalryan ~ - You know you've been hacking too long when... ...you are looking at an ASCII core dump of your OS project which has many O's and &'s in it (among other things), and you shout: "I see the problem. Orcs are attacking my demons." -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkf7rNMACgkQbtAgaoJTgL9VggCgpgHK+7+yLEitYjlG0+71Ahkw otAAn2/jKZS3RmAnMp0sLcyYVGQQzREI =CSoC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----